Epic Games Submits Fortnite to U.S. App Store

[Stuwil]

They didn't squeeze any handset maker or other mobile OS maker out of the market. You had Blackberry, HP/Palm, Microsoft CE then Metro, and whatever came out of Europe (Symbian I think). Plus Google Android, which is forked in Asia between Samsung and whatever China is doing. It all came back down to earth by people picking Apple and whatever handsets (Motorola, HTC, LG, Sony, etc) and Android.

Not either of those two companies faults. If anyone was to take a guess early on they would have picked Blackberry and Microsoft.

Again, not either of their faults. It just worked out that way.

This is because there are few companies that make this product "now". And there is almost never going to be a perfect company or product. You and everyone else will not like everything anyone makes. But, when those situations pop up in life. We are all free to do it ourselves and make the more perfect product.

They didn't make it impossible. They did such a good job that it is certainly hard. But, anyone could take a linux distro and give it a go. Maybe pick up PalmOS from HP and redo it. In any event, that's not either of their faults. It's hard, but that's part of creating a successful business. And if all we want to do is break apart successful business. Then what is the motivation for the next start up to try and enter a market or create something new? When the end result could be that it gets taken away from you or broken up to not be what was intended. Because it's too successful? Not fair.

google give android away for free to every company out there & every OEM use’s it
Plus it has a customer base of over 3.5 billion active users then how is a new company going to compete with that.
When even if you mange to convince an OEM to use your operating system
Then no developer will write apps for it because it will not be worth while time wise and money wise.

Because google gives android away for free and as a consequence of that nobody will be able to emerge in the west

 

[wbeasley]

There is nothing wrong with what the EU government has done
Or what courts are legislating
Or epic being potentially back on the USA iOS App Store.
I just don’t take it personally

Why would I be offended by a product I buy

personally I dont like being affected by EU decisions.

my phone, my known OS.
Apple was forced to make changes. That could affect me.

Would i have liked to install game emulators? Growing up in the 80s, yeah I would.
But did my want really mean I had to affect every other user when I could also emulate those same games on a PC or Android device?

So yeah I think the EU was wrong on this.

I will give them a point for forcing USB C power input.
But then they forgot to legislate speeds for data transfer... that's an oversight.

Epic knew the rules they signed up for.
They actively broke them.
Legal enforcement of Terms was the only action Apple had and took.
Epic didnt try to sway Apple to come to the party. They just did it. Fail fail fail.

You do indeed come across as offended iOS purchases dont meet your needs.
There are options that would.
You are just deciding to whinge instead of buying one of those options.

 

[Stuwil]

as i said, the phone OS wars are over. Accept it. move on.

Microsoft with all its resources couldnt compete. Hence we ended up with two competing yet similar platforms with the same apps pretty much on both. one having the freedom to install anything if you really want.

show me a competing idea and implementation plan that will change that.

there isnt one.

screenless AI devices didnt take off like Rabbit. For a good reason. they offered a new way of interacting that fell well short of the flexibility users get now. Voice interaction alone isnt great for email or messaging or web browsing. you need a screen. you need touch. five senses and they expected you to fall back to one (mostly)? it was clear when announced this was a tech fail coming.

VisionOS is a possible way forward.
but do most people really want to pay that much and wear an intrusive device with short battery life?
it still doesnt beat the current methods.

folding phones are still niche. they cost too much. i've never seen one being used on the streets. i'm sure there are influencers carrying them in their handbags maybe. perhaps i need to go to more hip places LOL.

what are you on about the phone wars are over move on
Eh that is why Apple are getting regulated by governments because there is no competition coming apart from google in the west

Microsoft couldn’t compete because are you ready for it developers wouldn’t make apps for it because google gives android away so that has allowed them to increase their market share worldwide so then they crushed Microsoft as a consequence because it’s free.

Android is free to use for any company to use so it doesn’t matter if your TCL or Samsung because google gives it away for free then they have made it deliberately impossible to compete and no government will ever stop it from being free

People do buy foldables just not Apple people that’s probably why you have never seen one

Vision OS 🤣🤣🤣

 

[Stuwil]

personally I dont like being affected by EU decisions.

my phone, my known OS.
Apple was forced to make changes. That could affect me.

Would i have liked to install game emulators? Growing up in the 80s, yeah I would.
But did my want really mean I had to affect every other user when I could also emulate those same games on a PC or Android device?

So yeah I think the EU was wrong on this.

I will give them a point for forcing USB C power input.
But then they forgot to legislate speeds for data transfer... that's an oversight.

Epic knew the rules they signed up for.
They actively broke them.
Legal enforcement of Terms was the only action Apple had and took.
Epic didnt try to sway Apple to come to the party. They just did it. Fail fail fail.

You do indeed come across as offended iOS purchases dont meet your needs.
There are options that would.
You are just deciding to whinge instead of buying one of those options.

are you based in the EU?
I suspect not
If you are in the USA and payment links are in apps just don’t click on the link

But you said that there is no point in complaining but Apple won’t listen anyway so because of that then epic took them to court because Apple wouldn’t negotiate with them

 

[heretiq]

If that is the case then how can any new company compete with android when google gives it away for free to every OEM for a start
So even if you somehow managed to convince an OEM to use your OS
Then you wouldn’t get apps for it because it would not be worth developers time & money to write apps for it
android has a customer base of over 3.5 billion users So it’s pretty pointless

By innovating. Offer superior utility, UX and value proposition. There’s a discipline to disruptive innovation. Professional product leaders understand the dynamics and no business is immune from disruption. Apple did that with the iPhone, Google copied them and used free OS to OEMs as a hedge. A new competitor can follow the Apple model and take a vertical integration approach. It’s not dependent on OEMs, and harder to pull off, but not impossible for people with the talent, guts and capital to try.

 

[Stuwil]

By innovating. Offer superior utility, UX and value proposition. There’s a discipline to disruptive innovation. Professional product leaders understand the dynamics and no business is immune from disruption. Apple did that with the iPhone, Google copied them and used free OS to OEMs as a hedge. A new competitor can follow the Apple model and take a vertical integration approach. It’s not dependent on OEMs, and harder to pull off, but not impossible for people with the talent, guts and capital to try.

ANDROID IS FREE
That’s the point you don’t pay for a license from google
It’s not 2007
Ok Microsoft tried it but no developers would make apps for it because android is free so it squeezes the competition out
Amazon tried it and failed because no developer would make apps for it
As long as google keep giving android away for free then it will currently be virtually impossible to launch a 3rd competitor

 

[surferfb]

ANDROID IS FREE
That’s the point you don’t pay for a license from google
It’s not 2007
Ok Microsoft tried it but no developers would make apps for it because android is free so it squeezes the competition out
Amazon tried it and failed because no developer would make apps for it
As long as google keep giving android away for free then it will currently be virtually impossible to launch a 3rd competitor

Developers don’t care that Android is free for handset makers; they care there are a lot of Android users. Developers go where the users are. Make a compelling device to users and developers will follow.

You really think if OpenAI or whoever makes an amazing phone designed by Jonny Ive (he’s literally working with OpenAI now) and a lot of users flock to it because it’s sleek, gorgeous and its OS is so infused with AI features that are way more advanced than anything Siri can do then developers are just going to go “eh?”

I’m not saying it’s easy, it’s absolutely not. But no one though Nokia and BlackBerry were going to be beaten either.

 

[wbeasley]

google give android away for free to every company out there & every OEM use’s it
Plus it has a customer base of over 3.5 billion active users then how is a new company going to compete with that.
When even if you mange to convince an OEM to use your operating system
Then no developer will write apps for it because it will not be worth while time wise and money wise.

Because google gives android away for free and as a consequence of that nobody will be able to emerge in the west

Google gave it away for free and anyone can use it to make their own path.
They might also have to share it with everyone.
But lots of the hard work has also been done for you. For free.

But no one, including Apple can overtake the installed base.

And if Apple can't, it's unlikely anyone else will.

A duopoly keeps both sides honest.
Apple puts features in (and let's remember Android looked NOTHING LIKE current Android before Apple released the iPhone) and then Android add them as well (AppStore for instance).
Android put features in and the Apple follow as well.

That's market driven design. Ignore the competitor at your own risk.

That's why we dont need all this government intervention.

If users arent getting what they want from one platform, another is waiting to take their money.

 

[wbeasley]

Developers don’t care that Android is free for handset makers; they care there are a lot of Android users. Developers go where the users are. Make a compelling device to users and developers will follow.

You really think if OpenAI or whoever makes an amazing phone designed by Jonny Ive (he’s literally working with OpenAI now) and a lot of users flock to it because it’s sleek, gorgeous and its OS is so infused with AI features that are way more advanced than anything Siri can do then developers are just going to go “eh?”

I’m not saying it’s easy, it’s absolutely not. But no one though Nokia and BlackBerry were going to be beaten either.

Funny and somewhat ironic that Nokia and Blackberry thought they were untouchable.
So arrogant that they had the market share and that was it.

And now both exist in name only really running Android that partly resulted in their fall from grace...

 

[Naraxus]

Because there are only two choices in mobile in the west so developers are practically forced to accept Apple’s terms regardless because then said developer would only have one choice

There are FAR MORE than your claim of there being "only two choices in mobile"

 

[wbeasley]

are you based in the EU?
I suspect not
If you are in the USA and payment links are in apps just don’t click on the link

But you said that there is no point in complaining but Apple won’t listen anyway so because of that then epic took them to court because Apple wouldn’t negotiate with them

Wrong. I am not based in EU or USA.

Your blind assumptions...

The phone as it stands is dead. The minimal feature adds in each new iteration... it's peak phone.

You could happily live with the current generation of phones forever.

Even Apple acknowledge that it will take a leap to something new to capture people's wallets.
They seem to think VisionOS or some variant is it. With AI.
Currrently it isnt competitive from a power or price view.

But word is parts of VisionOS are making their way into iOS this year.

No AI from any vendor has captured the public's imagination.
Most of us still think Siri is largely braindead. But coming soon interation may hopefully fix some of that.

So maybe there wont be some new huge jump forward but continual evolution towards a different device.

Apple's terms that Epic agreed to didnt force Apple to negotiate at all.
They were clear and Epic chose to actively ignore them.

I would argue not being in the AppStore for two years without a payment link in the app hurt them more and their reputation than taking the stance they did. If they somehow get back in it could easily be a hollow victory that doesnt offset the loses.

 

[Naraxus]

Currently there are only 2 options available in the west for mobile

Once again, there are far more than two options in the west for mobile but I'm guessing that since it doesn't allign with your narrative those other options get ignored

 

[revfife]

I’m so glad I’ve successfully avoided Fortnite at my house. I’m sure it’s a great game, but seems nothing more than a moneymaking scheme for Epic Games.

I long for the days where when you bought a game, you actually bought the game.

 

[heretiq]

ANDROID IS FREE
That’s the point you don’t pay for a license from google
It’s not 2007
Ok Microsoft tried it but no developers would make apps for it because android is free so it squeezes the competition out
Amazon tried it and failed because no developer would make apps for it
As long as google keep giving android away for free then it will currently be virtually impossible to launch a 3rd competitor

So? That’s an understandable perspective for a consumer. Lucky for all of us there are makers who continually invent and create possibilities where cynics see dead ends.

 

[wbeasley]

So? That’s an understandable perspective for a consumer. Lucky for all of us there are makers who invent and create possibilities where cynics see dead ends.

Google give it away for "free" because they get their money back from users "giving away" their information.
The consumer is the product to Google.

People undervalue the value of their private information.

 

[heretiq]

Google give it away for "free" because they get their money back from users "giving away" their information.
The consumer is the product to Google.

People undervalue the value of their private information.

Exactly. Giving it away was the easy path to distribution while also juicing their advertising/data brokerage business, but it’s not the only path.

 

[Stuwil]

Developers don’t care that Android is free for handset makers; they care there are a lot of Android users. Developers go where the users are. Make a compelling device to users and developers will follow.

You really think if OpenAI or whoever makes an amazing phone designed by Jonny Ive (he’s literally working with OpenAI now) and a lot of users flock to it because it’s sleek, gorgeous and its OS is so infused with AI features that are way more advanced than anything Siri can do then developers are just going to go “eh?”

I’m not saying it’s easy, it’s absolutely not. But no one thought Nokia and BlackBerry were going to be beaten either.

ok
I’m not disputing that developers will go if there is a user base
However not once have anyone explained that due to how the current smartphone market is setup and google gives android away for free
Then how can anyone currently compete with that if they launch a mobile os in the current market
And that is the problem

 

[Stuwil]

Once again, there are far more than two options in the west for mobile but I'm guessing that since it doesn't allign with your narrative those other options get ignored

What mobile options do you have apart from iOS and Android that you can use and get apps on like your banking apps

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Developers don’t care that Android is free for handset makers; they care there are a lot of Android users. Developers go where the users are. Make a compelling device to users and developers will follow.

You really think if OpenAI or whoever makes an amazing phone designed by Jonny Ive (he’s literally working with OpenAI now) and a lot of users flock to it because it’s sleek, gorgeous and its OS is so infused with AI features that are way more advanced than anything Siri can do then developers are just going to go “eh?”

I’m not saying it’s easy, it’s absolutely not. But no one though Nokia and BlackBerry were going to be beaten either.

Never once in the consumer space have 3 major vendors broken through in computing. It won't happen with OpenAI. Jony Ives knows nothing of Software. The best bet he had was at Apple for alternative ideas that ultimately the board shot down. Or do you think he was bored having the most advanced Industrial Design team in the world?

His pet projects were not going to fly so he retired from Apple.

 

[Stuwil]

Wrong. I am not based in EU or USA.

Your blind assumptions...

The phone as it stands is dead. The minimal feature adds in each new iteration... it's peak phone.

You could happily live with the current generation of phones forever.

Even Apple acknowledge that it will take a leap to something new to capture people's wallets.
They seem to think VisionOS or some variant is it. With AI.
Currrently it isnt competitive from a power or price view.

But word is parts of VisionOS are making their way into iOS this year.

No AI from any vendor has captured the public's imagination.
Most of us still think Siri is largely braindead. But coming soon interation may hopefully fix some of that.

So maybe there wont be some new huge jump forward but continual evolution towards a different device.

Apple's terms that Epic agreed to didnt force Apple to negotiate at all.
They were clear and Epic chose to actively ignore them.

I would argue not being in the AppStore for two years without a payment link in the app hurt them more and their reputation than taking the stance they did. If they somehow get back in it could easily be a hollow victory that doesnt offset the loses.

That’s why I said
I suspect your not based in the EU and IF you are in the US
There is a difference

Siri will never be that great because of Apple’s privacy policies that is why it’s constantly behind and will continue to be so since the 4S now Apple might make it slightly better but it will never be better than google’s offering

They wouldn’t negotiate on any fee that is why this all started with epic
Because Fortnite ONLY had a 7% market share on iOS that is why he took them to court because his game was not dependent on iOS unlike other companies that is Tim Sweeney’s point that most companies rely on iOS for their product so they just continue to accept the terms even if they are not good for them

 

[Stuwil]

Exactly. Giving it away was the easy path to distribution while also juicing their advertising/data brokerage business, but it’s not the only path.

You are correct that it’s not the only path however due to how google gives android away for free then no company currently can compete with that.
So what is this other path that a business can go down because based on how google operate then a independent new company wouldn’t be able to break through in mobile operating system in the west & that’s the problem
So that is why governments are regulating iOS and android because of how the smartphone market is in the west

 

[Stuwil]

Google give it away for "free" because they get their money back from users "giving away" their information.
The consumer is the product to Google.

People undervalue the value of their private information.

And that is why you only have two choices in mobile OS’s in the western world
So that is why for example Apple can tell a developer we are not negotiating on price because they no that in mobile app space there are only 2 choices
So that is why Apple are getting regulated by various governments and are getting told to make these changes to iOS

So is does actually matter that is why epic
As I have said previously will more than likely be back on the iOS App Store in the USA

 

[heretiq]

ok
I’m not disputing that developers will go if there is a user base
However not once have anyone explained that due to how the current smartphone market is setup and google gives android away for free
Then how can anyone currently compete with that if they launch a mobile os in the current market
And that is the problem

There is no problem if the mobile OS is more than a clone of existing alternatives. Consumers will select products that provide meaningful and differentiated utility and will pass on products that don’t because of switching costs. It’s that simple. I suspect the reason no one has explained what you want to hear is because apparently no one sees the problem you see. It’s on you to explain to us what we are missing — not just claim there’s a problem then wonder why no one swoops in to explains your point. I will however explain why I think what your point is a non-issue.

First off the unqualified assertion that Android is free is an incorrect oversimplification — the core licensing is free but Google and Microsoft charge device manufacturers for use of Google proprietary apps and Microsoft IP used in Android devices. These fees are one-time and range from $2.50 to $40/device. Incidentally the Google fees originated in the EU from anti-trust rulings. Compared to the profits generated by mobile devices over their lifetimes, these fees are de minimus. So, if mobile OS licensing is the issue you claim it is an innovative new entrant with their own OS could not only enjoy a cost advantage over Android, but also the potential to lure manufacturers to their ecosystem by undercutting Google and Microsoft fees to existing manufacturers. Net-net: non issue or actually a potential advantage.

 

[heretiq]

You are correct that it’s not the only path however due to how google gives android away for free then no company currently can compete with that.
So what is this other path that a business can go down because based on how google operate then a independent new company wouldn’t be able to break through in mobile operating system in the west & that’s the problem
So that is why governments are regulating iOS and android because of how the smartphone market is in the west

The alternative path is to build something that’s different and provides compelling utility to users and developers — aka innovating — and both will be willing to pay for that something.

 

[Stuwil]

There is no problem if the mobile OS is more than a clone of existing alternatives. Consumers will select products that provide meaningful and differentiated utility and will pass on products that don’t because of switching costs. It’s that simple. I suspect the reason no one has explained what you want to hear is because apparently no one sees the problem you see. It’s on you to explain to us what we are missing — not just claim there’s a problem then wonder why no one swoops in to explains your point. I will however explain why I think what your point is a non-issue.

First off the unqualified assertion that Android is free is an incorrect oversimplification — the core licensing is free but Google and Microsoft charge device manufacturers for use of Google proprietary apps and Microsoft IP used in Android devices. These fees are one-time and range from $2.50 to $40/device. Compared to the profits generated by mobile devices over their lifetimes, these fees are de minimus. So, if mobile OS licensing is the issue you claim it is an innovative new entrant with their own OS could not only enjoy a cost advantage over Android, but also the potential to lure manufacturers to their ecosystem by undercutting Google and Microsoft fees to existing manufacturers. Net-net: non issue or actually a potential advantage.

Google gives android away for FREE
So then you get access to the play store and chrome as a requirement so that means every OEM has access to every major app straight away

So what that essentially means is if heretiq was to launch a mobile OS then you would have to give it away for free to compete with Android
Then on top of that you would need the financial resources behind you to compete with a trillion dollar company

Then even if you managed to get your OS onto an OEM you would then have to get developers to make apps for it then that is very unlikely because of your zero customer base considering it has taken instagram to make an official iPad app after 15 years then that tells you everything

how does a startup compete with a product that is free from a big company because there is no incentive to go to another provider because it’s free and you already have an existing customer base already there of over 3.5 billion active users
that is why google gives android away for free because then it guarantees them number 1 position and no government will ever legislate for google to charge for android because it’s FREE